Italian agriculture in figures. 1997, (9th ed.)

MINISTERO PER LE POLITICHE AGRICOLE

ORTI I 1 (1IIe (I 4I(a 2 Iieinoiiie I 4fl)I)4I1H 4 1iiaiino ho Iije 5 eiie1o

h I ii,ili ‘. I1e!ia(itiI Ia 7 I ii.uria 1)111111 Ioiiiiiia CENTRE I IO&(llIh1 2 lJnihria 3 4 Iazio

sou

iii I \I)I’lIZZO 2 1oIise 3 ( ,innI 4 IiiIia 5 iI&iIiCfltll ((:hh•I 7Sicilia 8SarIegria 6

JtUliUfl

agriculture

in figures

1997

p

Oru agmn, this yar’s 1)OOk1(t on the /od awl agriculture sector published by

theACttiO!Zul Institute of IgriculturulE(ollornicS (L”vEl) _{testifies to the important} p(Utplayed hj this sector in the ito/ia,, ((onoIn3: not only in terms of value added. (‘lllf)loYIfl(!lt (111(1foreign tla(lv but (1150 in its unique and vital contribution to the conservation of the eiu’imnrnent (irid to the enhancement of rural (ireas and the quality offood.

A large section oft/ic booklet is dedicated to the application ofEuropean Union

policies in_{Italy, especially structural arid rural (terelopinent policies. These are} of considerable topical interest and importance, as this is a crucial time for the common agricultural policy and a period of great change for national agricultural poliç’v The recent statement issued _y the European Commission “Agenda 2000” confirms, iii_{fact, the community’s intention of reimfbrcing and}

broadening the rfbrmn process begun in 1992 ki extending the direct aid system to other sectors andlydeveloping a coherent rural development policy

We are following these issues with great attention, and with the intelligent and

constructive helpof_{all the members of the agricultural world, with whom we are}

developing and maintainingactive contacts, we will certainly be making our assessments arid putting forward concrete proposals. And there is no doubt that ]AEA will be helping us to do this.

In this introduction to the ninth edition of the booklet “Italian agriculture in figures“, I wish to express my thanks to the staff of IiVEAfor their hard work and promptness in preparing an extremely informative and easy-to-consult publication for the benefit ofpublic institutions and all those who operate in the

Jltiehele Pinto

IVlinisterfiurAgrwulturalPolicies

Unless otheru’isc indicated

all the statistics contained in this booklet

have been provided by ISTAT and I/VEil.

For international comparisons,

EUROSTAT statistics have been used.

The statistics found in this publication may be consulted on Internet address: http://www. inea. it!

—

<1800

—

1800<2000

2000 <2200

>2200

Climate*

Average temperature (°C) of the coldest month (ianuary)

I

Average temperature (°C) of the warmest month (July)

Hours of sunshine per year

Total rainfall per year (mm)

—

<0 ci 0<3

—

3<6

over 6

(*) Thiriy-year averages. Source: SIAN-UCEA Rome

—

<15

—

15<21 21<24 over 24 >1200 1200> 800 800< 600 < 600

6

7

‘I’

General features

Italy’s main geographical feature is the prevalence of hilly and mountainous regions. Out of a total surface area of about 30 million hectares, only 23% of lta1y is made up of lowland and this figure falls to 18% in the South and 9% in the Centre.

Over the last few years, population growth has been almost entirely the result of foreign immigration, whereas the size of the Italian

populattola has been stationary or

has fi’llen. In 1996 the resident

population increased by 0.25%

compared to 1995; this increase was

unevenly spread between the (entre orth (+0.3%) and the South

(+0.14%).

UAL Population Density Workforce (%) (‘000) (1) inhab./km2 (‘000 units) _L26 213 11,121 11,030 189 4,509 20911 110 1220 51,413 i’ll 22,850 5,831 12,306 30,132

Territory and Population

North Centre South 119,894 58,365 123.059 ITALY 42.5 46.1 56.0 301,318 48.1 Mountainous j1y Lowland Centre South --Q -!-p 4.189 1,578 —--534 TOTAL (1) Estimated at31-121996.

Territory and Population j,fation/agricultura1 land ratios(*,) _{Agricultural land and}

Geographical Total available territory

area territory(km2) - Italy 346 Inhabitants,’lOO

hectaresUAL The urbanization process is

— France 192 prugressivel absorbing land in

Italy. The total amount of

.

—-—— —--

———-—————-.——-Spain 156 unproductive land due to the

spread of built-up areas and

Greece 215 infrastructure is increasing; it is

(1) Residentpapulatian, 1996 estimates. c arre n tly e stimated a t abo ut 3

United Kingdom 369 million hectares, equivalent to

almost 10% ofnational territory

Territory by altitude (‘000 hectares) (1) Denmark 1 92 The amount ofagricultural land,

on the other hand, is steadily

Type of territory North Germany 411 decreasing: according to the most

recent structural surveys, used

Belgium 143 agricultural land (UAL)_{dropped since 1970 by about 2.8}has

million hectar’

_(-

16%).

Austria 233 _{This is a phenomenon which}

Ave affects all the European Union

countries, but it is particularly

marked in Italy. For example,

(*) Total population in 1995, estimates from the European Cammissian. between 1989and1993, according

3,503 6,548 2.255 T189 Italy -_ 12,543 6.978

8

9

to the EUROSTAT structural in LALin Italy compared to (In

surveys, there was a 1.4% decrease average of 0.6%.

Use of land in Italy and EU countries

(%

total territory)

Italy Other Mediterranean Other EU Former EFTA Total EU-15 countries (*) countries(**) countries(***)

_________ 29.9 20.1 30.9 7.2 22.0 10.6 9.0 1.3 0.1 2.5 0 - 0.2 0.1 0.2 .- ----..- 14.1 23.1 3.0 15.6 Woodland 21.4 30.1 22.4 55.9 33.1 dwaterw3y2A 1.3 11 8.4

pwductive ens and otheand(3) 21.3 na. 2LOn.n

TOTAL AREA ( 000 hectares) 30 132 /2 986 133 323 8/117 323 618

na.=not available

(*) Greece, Spain, PortugaL (**)_{France, Germany including ex GDR, Benelux Denmark, Ireland, Great Britain.}(***)_{Austria, Finlano Sweden.} (1) Including temporary forage craps and fallow land.

(2) Tree craps and other permanent craps.

(3) Civic buildings and industrial plants, infrastructure, rocks and barren land; “other land” includes abandoned and uncultivated land ornamental parks and gardens,

farm land occupied by buildings, courtyards, roads and unused land between crops.

1,800 1,100 Current prices 1,600 1,500 1,400

LQQ

L1QQ

iLQ 900 800 100 600 500 400 300 200 100 ‘86 ‘88 ‘90

Gross Domestic Product

Use Arabdd(1) Permanentcronj) pggjeardpns Permanent crass endnnstiire

Grossdomestic prodiut19 6- 1996 bultion tire,)

1,813

1990prices

1,395

In order to describe the relationship between agriculture and the

environment in Italy, one must above

all look at the evolution of the ET ‘s environmental policy. This has developed considerably over the last few years, especially since the 62.1 — addition of the Environmental

Protocol to the Single European Act

of 1986, which established the need for common action in order to

conserve the envirotunent.

The three Environmental Action Programmes of 1973- 76, 1977-81 and 1982-86 already contained guidelines for the EU’s environmental policy and these are still valid to a 24.3 — certain extent, but it was the Single

Act which laid down the legal basis for environmental projects and which supplied a framework of reference for various kinds of unilateral intervention.

An important feature of the Single

Act was the stipulation that the conservation of the environment must be considered an essential

element

qf

all other EL policies. This

integrated approach was

emphasised further in the Fourth (1987- 92,) and Fifth started in 1993) Environmental Action Programmes. As far as the agricultural sector in J)articular is concerned, numerous specific EU measures for the environment ivere passed during the ‘70s and ‘SOs, but EEC Regulation 797/85 was the first legisla tire measure to link agricultural poliqy with conservation of the environment, one of its primary objectives being to curtail

oveiproduction.

A series of measures followed which were drawn up to achieve more general o bjec tites of agricultural

policy bitt which benefited the environment at the same time,

through incentives for low-impact agricultural activities, conversion and extensification of production and set-aside. Among these, structural amid territorial measures such as Regulations 2 052/88, 4253/88 amid 2328/91 should be noted.

Regulation 2092/91, later amended by Regulation 2083/92, had a direct effect on agriculture, in that it

concerned organic farming.

Although there was no provision for

financial aid in the regulation, it recognized the role of organic farming in conserving the environment and the countryside, and it provided rules for the production and

marketing of organic products. Amomig the recent measures

accompanying the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), Regulation 2078/92 opened the way to a system of direct aid payments GDP per inhabitant and per labour unit, 1986-1996 (million lire)

Agriculture and Environment

Current prices 84.1 1990 prices

GDP/inhabitant

5

GDP/t.U 65 60 s 55

TA

I

Q

32.6

12

A

13

for farmers who introduce and maintain methods of agricultural production compatible with the

conservation and care of nature and the counti side. This regulation has been implemented over the whole of

the count!’)’ through multiannual

regional schemes.

Among other recent Community

initiatives which affect the primary sector directly or indirectly, the following should be mentioned:

• Regulation 2080/92, by whi(h a system of aid was set up for forestry- related measures in the agricultural sector. The premiums and incentives for forestry investments have the dual aim of

conserving the envirorunent and reducing agricultural production; • Regulation 1973/92, by which a

fund for the environment (LIFE,)

was set up. A budget cf 400

million ecu was made available

for the period 1991-95, to be allocated to projects contrthutmg

to the development and application of EU legislation and poliry regarding the environment while respecting the “polluter-pays” principle and the

subsidiarityprinc4ole;

Directive 43/92, concerning the

conservation of natural and

semi-natural habitats of wild animals and flowers. The main objective of this directive was to protect biodiversity; for this purpose, special conservation areas are to

be identified constituting a

European ecological network

(Nature 2000,);

• oinmunity initiative programme LEADER Ij, set up in Juty 1994

and adopted by the Regions ivith

a mute programmne for promoting

rural development schemes in which agriculture with a low impact on the environment, crops for the production of energy, conservation of the euuvimomument

arid rural touiismn play a

prominentpart:

• at national level, in addition to legislation connected with Community regulations, mnentiomu

must be made of Framework Law

394/91 for protected areas promoted by the Environment

Ministry, regulating agricultural activity in these areas, and the Second Three-Year Plan approved

on I /12/95, which provided funding amounting to 154.6 billion lire for the implementation of the framework law jr the period 1994-96.

Protected areas

The following five national parks

have been established for many yearsin ltaly • Gran Paradiso 70,286 ha • Stelvio 134,620 ha 7flfl •Abruzzo 43,900 ha vu • (‘irceo 8,400 ha • Calabria 12,690 ha

The establishment of the following national parks was approved under the Finance Law for 1988 (Law 67,)

56

_{and the Three-Year Plan for the}

Conservation of the Environment

28

(Law 305 dated 29/8/1989,):

• Dolomiti Bellunesi 31,512 ha • Monti Sibillini 71,437 ha • Pollino 192,565 ha

• Parco Nazionale dell’Aspromonte 78,517 ha

I

SIZE OF AREAS (‘000 hectares)

Protected areas

NUMBER OF AREAS

18 NaonaI parks

71 Regional nature parks

171 Regional nature reserves

I

154

-

State nature reserves

I

94

-

Other protected nature areas

71

(*) At2 December 199b. (1) Plus 71,812 marine hectares.

Use of Chemicals

• Foreste Casentinesi del Monte Falterona and (ainpigna 38,118 ha • 4rcipelago Toscano /7,887 ha

(land) and 56,766 ha (sea,) The following national parks were established under Framework Law 394/1991 for protected areas: • Gran Sasso arid Monti della Laga

148,935 ha

• Gargano 121,118 ha • Vesuvio cS,482 ha • Maiella 7,095 ha

• Cilento and VoIle di Diano 181,048 ha

• Val Grande 12,210 ha

The most recent national park was set up under Presidential Decree on

17/5/1996:

• Arcipelago de La Muddalena 5,134 ha (‘land) and 15.046 ha

(sea)

Over the last few decades there has been a considerable increase in

agiicultural productivity owing,

amongother frwtors.toa greater use of chemicals. In many cases this has undermined the positive contribution of agriculture to the conservation of the environment. In more recent years, hou’ever, there has been a slightly downward trend in the use of chemicals which is probably due

to the new (‘4P guidelines and to the crop protection schemes set up by many Regions.

The effects of an intensive use of pesticides are reflected to u great

extent in the perception of the quality of agricultural produce by

consumers. In order to obtain adequate infirmation on this subject,

the former 1/Iinistry of Agriculture, Food and Foresti set up a network

to monitor the residue of chemicals in agricultural products. According to the results obtained in the first four years of monitoring, 2-4% of samples contain a higher residue than the maximum allowed by law; on an average, the residue content is higher in vegetables than in fruit. The same kind of survey carried out by the Ministry of Health shows similar results.

State-protected areasby Region. 1 994 (area in hectares)(*)(5)

Region/Aut.Prov. Protected areas % total protected areas % Regional territory Hectares/100 inhab.

Piemoote 5.9 7 42 Voile d’Aosto 4j,10 1.4 12.6 34.1 Lombordia 507Aj6 16.9 21.3 5.7 9 4 -- 20! -. -- - 31.2 Boizano-Bozen j]42.___ 6 24.5 — 40.2 Trento 3.4 16.6 22.4 Veneto 77,060 26 —. 4.2___ 1.7 Friuii-VenGiuli4ó_ L8 — -. 7 - —.— 4 - --._ 3 5.2 1.1 1 Toscana 12i.LQ.... 4.2 55 3.6 Umbria 2 7 1.2 Morche _jLi__—--- Z4 LL Lazio_ jj4 37 6.5 2.2 Abruzzo _______ 9.1 21.1 23.1 Mouse ,0 0.2 1.3 1.1 3_ 25 - 5.9 Basiiicota 103,625 3.4 — 10.4 11 Caiobria 66 13.1 9.5 Sicilia ___2Q303—-&L---iS_A Sardegna 1,781 - 01 0.1 0.1 ITALY 3,001,021 100 10 5.2

(*)_{Excluding marinr areas.}(**)_{At 31 December.}

j

Source: Ministry of Environment- CNR, Evolutionist Genetics Study Centre.

Type of pesticide

Pesticides distributedfor agricultural use, by type and degree of toxicity, 1993 (tonnes of active components) Degree of toxicity cides insecticides Weedkiilers Others TOTAL 195 iLQQ 295 6,339 8,129

Very toxic/toxic Harmful Negligible Nil Total

tonnes % tonnes % tonnes % tonnes % tonnes % 0.5 18.0 3.1 51.2 12.3 4.042 -i-L 2,542 9.621 10.6 26,511 13.0 — 3,135 17.4 4,168 20.5 1,025 3.6 34,839 69.4 29.7 43.6 8.3 4Q•3 1,414 19.6 4,144 39.3 3,425 35.9 2,478 20.0 11.521 24.8 38,220 100._ 10,554 100.0 9,550 100.0 12,384 100.0 10.‘is (iii II

17

1,600 1,400 __

I

1,000 800 600 400 200 ‘88 ‘90 ‘92

ronsamption offertilisers and chemicals (billion lire)

1,Boo

Current prices 1,860 1990 prices

1,404 _________

I

Chemicals 11 Fertilisers 1,496

1e offerlilizers and chemicals in Italy in 1994 (retail sales)

Nitrogen Phosphate Potassium oxide (‘000 quintals)(*) North —— 4,285 2,683 2,368 83,831

?ii

1,471 1,169 363 21,156 uth 2,671 2,002 621 ITALY 8,421 5,854 3,352 151 4 1082

I

(*)_{1 quintul= 100 kg}

I!!

ii

Chemicals (‘000 kg)

18

_::f. .

A

19

S

WELLA

TVI)iLSID1III

fl19V

The agri-industrial system is made up of a series of activities in which agriculture interacts with the sectors connected with it: the production of inputs used in agriculture (fertilizers, pesticides, animal feed,

energy etc,), the food industry and the catering industi)’c

The ecpnomic size of the agri indus trial sector is estimated, for 1996, at approximately 286,000

billion lire, equivalent to 15.3% of

the GDP. It is made up of the following components: 52,000 billion in value added (VA) in the agricultural sector; 20,000 billion in intermediate agricultural inputs, 29,000 billion in agri-industrial

investments, approximately 45,000

billion in V4 in the food industry and approximately 132,000 billion in marketing and distribution.

Structure

Main components of the agri-industrial system

TOTAL (billion lire) 286,253

VA in agriculture (1)

_SiZS.

Intermediate agricultural inputs (1) 1 9,893 Marketing and distribution 131,616

VA in food industry (2) 45,000

Agricultural production sudsidies (1) 9,014 Agri-industrial investments 28,911

11

FACTORS OF PRODUCTION

Intermediate Inputs

Agricultural Credit

Investment

Employment

10.1%, 31’ -(1) Including fishing. (2) At market prices.

22

23

Intermediate Inputs Agricultural (redit

Expenditure on intermediate inputs

came to over 19,200 billion lire in 1996, an increase in value of 3.6%

compared to 1995. For the fourth

consecutive year there was a drop in quantities used (‘-0.7%), a higher drop. than the one which emerged in the final figures for 1995 (-0.2%). There was a fall in the use of animal

feed (-2.1%,) and fertilizers (-1.4%,), ivhereas there was an increase in the use of seeds (+4.9%) and

pestici(les (+1.7%,).

Price increases were smaller than in 1995, reaching an annual average of 4.3%, compared to % the year before. Energy prices rose in particular (+6.3%), reflecting the increase in the price of agricultural

diesel fuel (+11%), and there were

also increases in the prices of animal feed and other expenses for livestock (‘+4.7%,).

Expressed as a percentage of the

value of final output (VFO,), the value of intermediate inp a ts

dropped to 27.8% in 1906,

compared to 2S. 1% in /995.

Pesticides Other goods and services 2,401

Energy 2,936

Absolute figures for 1996 shoiv (1

steadytiterease in short teim credit

which, fllou;irtg the excellent

results achieved in .1995, increased by a further 10%.

6% of all short-term. credit was on

!‘e(iuced mterest rates.

Jh’diu in and long- term cri’dit, on the other hand, dropped by 4% from

/995.

65% of’ lne(lium and long-term credit was on reduced interest rates.

Thefluctuation in the use of credit is confirmed by the fact that the total amount of credit, expressed us a percentage of VFO, dropped from 32.6% in 1995 to 31.2% in

/996. Main categories of intermediate inputs (billion lire)

ITALY 19,236 Agricultural credit at year end (billion lire) (1)

Fertilisers 1,860 Seeds 1,036 Feed (1) 2.S22 1,404

Year Short-term Medium and long-term Total % VFO

24 i2L_ L845 11,484 1___ - 2Q)60 L?___ 5j 13,814 1994 2i6 978 1995 f38 14,640 22,4j__________________ 1996 8,589 14,026 22,615 31.2

(l)Including other expenses for livestock.

(1) Including credit for fisheries. Source: Book of Ito/p.

In 1996 fixed gross investments increased in real terms by about

9.6% in the agricultural sector. At

constant prices, there was a

considerable improvement in the ratio of investment to value added,

which reached 31.6%. Agricultural

investments also represented a

greater percentage of total

investments in the Italian economy

(6.5%). The level of agricultural investment per labour unit, at constant 1990 prices, reached 9.3 million lire: 17% less than in industry and 36% less than in the service industry

Investments in machinery and equipment increased by over 9%, at constant prices, benefiting from a rise in demand. There was also a

notable increase in non

residential building

(approximately +12%) bitt there

was a drop in property

Investment

Trends in agricultural investments (*,)

(*) Including forestry end fishing, (1) At 1990 prices,

Constant values 1990 prices (billion lire)

improvements and drainage operations (approximately -10%). % of total gross fixed investments (1) ________ — Buildings

10,000 Machinery and equipment

— Vehicles 9,000 Current values (billion lire)

I

% of agricultural VA (1)

£1’Iaehinery, buildings and other forms of investment (‘billion lire,)

Current prices 1990 prices

L

E

, 8,OOO 1992 16239 5,000

4

iz

4000 1995 18991 14904 58 — — 293 3000

1

1996 21 557 16340 65 316 iQLQQ 2,000 1,000 ‘86 ‘88 ‘90 ‘92 ‘94 ‘96 ‘86 ‘88 ‘90 ‘92 ‘94 ‘96

27

1,000

26

Employment

The total workforce in employment inItaly, eapressed in labour units, increased slightly (+0.2%,) in 1996, putting an end to the downward trend of the previous four years. Demand for labour rose in the service industry (+1.5%), but it dropped in agriculture (-3%), in

industry (-0.5%) and in the public sector (‘-0.5%,).

In the agricultural sector, there was a fall in the number of both hired

workers (‘-2.7%,) and sqf-employed

workers (-3.2%). In the former category there was a decrease in absolute terms of around 16,000

units, and a frill from 3.8% to 3.7% of the total number of labour units in Italy. In the latter category there was a decrease of around 39,000

units, and a fall from 17.7% to 17%

of the total number of sef-employed units in Italy.

LU by sector (‘000 units) Percentage ofpopulation employed in agriculture

28.3% TOTAL 22,213 Agriculture 1,755 Industry 6,291 Services (1) 1 4,221 EI1 5.3%

AGRICULTURE

INDUSTRY

SERVICES

3.1% 14.1% 1

(1) Including the public sector.

h

19.100 15.9% ‘70 11.0%

24.1%

‘80 ‘96

28

₂₉

AGRI-FOOD SECTOR

Number of employed in agriculture in the EU

Belgium 1.5 Number of employed per 100 hectares UAL

Denmark 4.2

Germany

69

Value Added

Greece . 16.1

Productivity

Spain 4.4

Production Levels

France 3.6

Ireland

Prices and

Costs

Italy _-: 9.0

Value of Final Output and Farm Income

Luxembourg 4.7

Food Industry

Distribution

Netherlands 123

Portugal 127

United Kingdom 3.4

.

Food Consumption

Austria 7.7

Foreign Trade

Finland 6.0

Sweden 3.6

Source: La situation de I’ogricolture dons I’Union Furopêenne, Rapport 1996, onnexe stotistique, DG VI.

Value Added

contribution by agriculture to the VA of the Italian economy was equivalent to 3.5% of the total, a similar result to 1995. At constant Contribution of agriculture to national economies in 1995 (*) Countries Value added % Employment %

1.1 1.8 1.6

prices, the con trib u lion by agriculture to total national V4 at frzctor cost dropped from 8.1% in

1970 to 6.2% in 1980 and to 3.8%

in 1996. In the same period the

contribution by industry also dropped, whereas the contribution

by the service industry increased

considerably; reaching around 65% oftotal VA.

The contribution made by

agriculture to the economy in Italic is higher than in other industrialized countries, especially

in terms of employment. Despite a

general tendency in recent years for Italy to move closer to the position of countries in the Centre-North of Europe, a strong regional dfference

still remains, especially between North and South.

Productivity

In 1996 VA at factor cost in the

primarysector increased, compared to 1995, by 6.4% in current value and by 1.9% in quantity. The

VA by sector (billion lire)

Italy France Spain Greece Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Austria Finland Sweden EU 15 USA(I) Japan (2) 2.7 2.0 3.0 1.3 0.8 2.9 11 0.4 TOTAL Agriculture, forestry, fishing

1.5 4.9 9.3 20.4 3.3 3.1 2.1 10.0 7.7 3.0 5.3 2.3 6.4 ]iL449 61,595 512,868 1,182,986 Industry

Services, including the public sector

VA/LUby sector at 1990 prices (million lire,)

Industry 65,659 65,000 4LQQQ 40LQQQ 35000 30000 25,000 __OOOO QO 10,000 5,000 0 ‘86 ‘88 ‘90 ‘92 ‘94 ‘96 ‘86

(*)_{Including fnrestrt fishing and hunting.}

(1) Value added gure refers tu 1992.

(2) Value nddednndempluymentfiguresrefertu 1992.

32

It constant prices, VA at factor cost

per labour unit in the agricultural

Services 69 838W sector was equal to 44.9% of the

fgure for industry and 42.2% of the figure for time service industry (commerce, transport, credit,

tourism and other services,); over the previous ten years, it had amounted to 38% of JA in industry and approximately31% of VA in the service industry: Agriculture 29,502

iiiiIi

‘88 ‘90 ‘92 ‘94 ‘96 ‘86 ‘88 ‘90 ‘92 ‘94 ‘96

(1) Excluding the pubhc nectar.

Production Levels

rainfall in some southern areas. which destroyed or seriously damaged crops.

In the main production sectors, results were generally satisfactoiy: field crops increased by 1.5%; tree

crops, after the drop in production in 1995 (‘-3.1%), showed a 1.9%

increase; livestock production increased by 2.4%.

Cereal production showed an appreciable increase in real terms

(‘+66%,). [‘his result was parity due to the expunsion of maize crops, and

pait to a loner drop, compared to

1995, in the production of soft wheat. The piodu ction figure for oilseeds reflected opposite trends for soya seeds and sunflowers seeds: there was a considerable increase in

soya seeds but a large decrease in

sunflower seeds, due mainly to the reduction in production for non-food

Agriculturaiproductiorm and changes (‘Ofl1pred to 1995 (*)

Crop -- -- - ---—---

a[Qtput

-Quantity Value ‘000 tonnes % change billion lire % change

fheat -0.8 1L114 -10.3

hard wheat 4,110 4.1 L43O -4.1

ie - 794 12.9 ,516 2.6 1A2 7.3 1jQ 6.9 Z3 - jii 49 tobacco 122 -2.4 581 -11.9 821 9 354 sunflowers 486 -8.9 160 -18.5 potatoeydinar 1 ) -- -OJ - 7763 tomatoes 6,11 23.3 1L6h1 20.0 127 wine(’OOOhl) 4.5 6,901 23.8

oves (for table) 18 -8.8 164 5.6

-105

JAL

peaches and nectarines il3361j

j,973 235 _j91341

lemons 639 17.6 562 24.7

mandarins and clementines 483 7.2 375 15.4

kiwi 342 9.0 439 7.5

I

There was a considerable decrease

in the quantity of sugar beet produced but the effect on income u’as mitigated by a good average degree of polarization. Vegetable production increased on an average by 1.7%; there was a significant increase in tomatoes (+23.3%) but a large drop in new potatoes (-23%). After a period of progressive expansion, the production offlowers and ornamental plants showed an appreciable decrease (-6.8%), reflecting a drop in internal consumption and a less lively foreign demand. There was also a drop in market gardening production (‘-4%,).

As regards ‘—e _{crops, fruit}

production increased by 8.3%; there was a notable rise in pears

(+14.7%) and apricots (+29%). The

market, however; registered a large

drop in prices. In 1996 the agricultural sector

showed a rise in production levels after practically stationary results ire 1995. Final output increased by 1.9% in quantity and by 4.7% in value.

Climatic conditions were on the whole satisfactory, apart from the natural disasters which hit certain par/s of the country, such as the violent downpour in the Versilia area ,and the extremely heavy

VFO by production sector

uses.

Production sector North Centre South Italy billion lire % billion lire % billion lire % billion lire %

(1) Including forage. Field crops (1) 10,112 28.6 3,121 395 9,447 -- 37.5 23,280 33.3 jggprpj 6,354 1 8.0 2,406 25.6 if22L 40.5 . Livestock 18,301 51.9 3,139 33.3 ,393 21.4 26,839 38.4 p!2tr 529 1.5 148 1.6 156 0.6 3 1.2 TOTAL 35,302 100.0 9,414 100.0 25,217 - 100.0 69,933 100.0 (*)_{Provisional data.} (1) 1 quinta/= 100 Kg

₃₅

There was an increase incitrusfruit

production (+ l.

%),

allowing the sector to recover after the poor

results c?t previous yc us.

Production increased in the grape

Type of

livestock and product

and wine sector: dessert grapes by 31.6% aridwine by 4.5%, including DOC and IGTwines.

In the olive sector, there uus a 2.1% drop in olive oil, partly VFO in agriculture by main sector (billion lire)

11.9%

24.2%

10.3%

TOTAL — ±lPO

14.9%

Cereal. foraae and dried pulses (1) 6,942 Horticultural (2) 10,270

Industrial crops (3) 2,351

Flowers and ornamental plants 4,693

Grapes 7,556

i3Iain livestock production in 1996 and changes compared to 1995

4.8%

because t _{was the low-yield year of} the two-year production cycle and partly because of the damage caused by bad weather to the olive crop in the South.

Olives 3,342

Fruit including citrus 7,107

Meat 16,709

Milk 8,201

Eggs and other 1,929

Quantity (5)

1000tonnes % change

Production

(1) Forage crops accounted for 162 billion lire, dried pulses for 109 billion lire. (2) Including potatoes and fresh pulses. (3) Sugar beet tobacco, nilseeds, textile fibres and other industrial products.

36

Value billion lire % change

CollIe (1) j43 p — 6.6 gpap4gpats 100 —- 444 5.6 1,399 — 3,863 15.9

___________LL.

12.9 ggp_(_ 12,44 0.2 1,865 15.5 Cow’s milk(4) 10%52 2.5 7,323 9

Sheen and goat’s milk (4) 6,974 2.4 8/ — 3.2

(1) Including buffaloes (148,000 head).

(2) Figures for 1996 from UNA: 105.4 milhon chickens, 52.3 milhon laying hens, 13.3 milhon turkeys, 5.3 milhon guinea faw( 1.2 milhon ducks and geese. (3) Production in miions.

(4) Production in ‘000h buffalo milk included with cowmilk. (5) Liveweight for meat.

I’rices and L;osts

Agricultural productioninElicountries in 1995

Gross output Country mecu (*) % llcil________ pjggup 6,71l3 Denmark

-

6,908— 3.3 Greece 8,498 4.1 ppjp 1L3 France 45,579 22.0 Ireland 4,381 2.1 Luxembourg 197 0.1 Netherlands 17,112 8.3 Portugal 3,489 1.7 United Kingdom 18,231 8.8 Austria 3,704 1 .8_ Finland 2,219 1.1 Sweden 3.165 1.5 Intermediate inputs as% of gross output 9.0 28.0 4j64 4.3 61.5 3,522 3.6 51.0 1]8 18.7 55.8 j,98 2.4 27.0 10,585 10.9 45.3 28 22.9 48.8 Q2L 2.1 463 84 0.1 42.6 8!291 8.5 48.5 j,192 1.8 51.4 9,633 9.9 52.8 1.828 1.9 49.4 1,510 1.6 68.0 2106 2.2 66.5

In the livestock sector, the final output of beef was affected by the epidemic of Bovine Spongiforrn Encephalepathy more comrnonly known as BSE. After a critical period in which demand fell, there was, however, an increase in the slaughter of Italian cattle, and final output is estimated to have risen by 3%. The production of other kinds of meat increased, stimulated by the positive trend in the market: pork by 2.4%, poultry ly 2.3% and rabbit by 1.9%. Milk production also rose. There was a noticeable drop in the

quantity of’forestry products

(-4.3%).

In 1996 the prices of intermediate In[)lltS rose by 4.3%. i smaller

increase thami the one recorded in 1995. Energy and feed prices rose in

Index numbers (base 19e15=100)

Hired labour costs

— Investments

Agricultural producer prices

— Intermediate inputs

price ofagricultural machinery,

however, rose by over 10%. Hired lahour costs increased by around 2.7%. Producer prices increased by

an average of2.7%, staying below the inflation rate (3.9%). In some sectors, however, for example cereals, there was a marked drop in prices. Tree crops showed wide variations with a considerable drop in some fruit prices (‘-12% for pears, -5% for peaches,) and an increase in citrusfruit prices (+8%). There was

an appreciable increase in the prices of wine (+19%) and olive oil (+24%). In the livestock sector; there was an average price increase of

2.7%, the result of a large drop (-11.3%) in beef prices on the one hand andgenemsi increases in the price of almost all other kinds of meat and livestock products on the Intermediate inputs

mecu (*) %

particular (+6.3% and +4.7%

r’espectivey,) and there was an

average ncreuse ofaround 4% in

the price ofinrestment goods; the

EU 15 207,397 100.0 91,001 (*) 1ecu=approx.2.130lire 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 8’89’90’91’92’934’95 ‘96

I

other.

38

Value of Final Output and Farm Income

Food Industry

increase in percentage compared to

1995.

Gross value added at factor cost

61,595

Net value added at factor cost

43,422 Net operating profits 29,415

Production subsidies

9,119

In 1996 the food industry produced

((iou/id9% ofUI, at factor cost, in the manufacturing industry as a whole.

For the first timein _{tivelve years the}

food and drink industry showed a decrease in production (-1.4%), which was due, mainly, to a progressive fallin consumption on

the internal market and, to a lesser extent, to a drop in exports.

There were decreases in the following sectors: alcoholic drinks (-8.6%,), beer (-10%), meat (-4.7%), processed fish and derivatives

(-14.1%).

There were increases, on the other

hand, in baby and diet foods (+6.4%), pasta (‘÷4.9%) and processed and preserved fruit and

vegetables (+4.8%).

At market prices, VA in the food industry increased in real terms by 3.7%.

In 1996, 17F0 in the agrtcultural Break-down offarm income (*,) (billion lire) sector, including production

subsidies, was made up as follows:

24.5% in intermediate inputs (seeds, Final output fertilizers, feed, energy etc); 17.1%

in hired labour wages; 36.1% in

rewards to self-employed labour Gross

value added

(frirmers, entrepreneurs and family at

market

prices workers), capital and business; ₅₃₃₀₂ 22.3% in depreciation.

Subsidies and grants from the State, Ministries, Regions and the EU amounted to around 11.2%, an

UI at factor cost

III:—

Intermediate inputs 20,003

Indirect taxes on production

826

Depreciation

18,113 Hired labour wages 13,941

(*) Including forestry and fishing.

21,192 4,880 6,151

40

Value added Centre South 33,423 Billion lire ____________ North Centre South 54.3 00i % of VA

1Q14

54.6 in agriculture North ______ South

41

in our country; the food market is in

constant evolution and it attracts considerable national and foreign investment. Although there is an increase in industrial concentration in the sector, there is still a large number of small and medium-sized firms involved in production (approximately 32,000 firms with around 370,000 employees). These firms are unevenly distributed over the country, and there are considerable structural and technological differences among them, especially comparing the South to the Centre-North. The processing industry is mainy concentrated in the North, where

the VA growth rates over the last ten years have almost always been

higher than in the South.

In the European Union, the agri food sector is one of the most important sectors from the point of

i

“I

view of employntent arid value added.

7

lhout 5% of the production of the EL (12,) is concentrated in Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain and Holland. In the lust tenyears, there has been

a particularly marked growth in production in Denmark, Ireland and Greece. Among the new Member States, Sweden and Finland show growth trends, whereas the position of’4nstria is more criticaL

The food industry in the European Union in 1994(*,) Country % turnover % employment

llciy__ J!1L France 19.2 15.6 Benelux 11.0 8.2 Denmark 3.3 2.8 Urbtedj(fgo1&6 Spain 9.1 15.0 Other (1) 5.5 - 1.4 EU 12 (2) 516,858 (3) 2,356

(*) Including drinks andtobacco. (1) Ireland) Greece, PortugaL

(2) Milbon ecu; exchange rate (1994) 1 ecu= l9l5lireapprox. (3) ‘000 labour units.

Source: EUR0STAT- “Panorama de l’industrie cumunautaire-supple

ment can/oncturel” n.6-1995.

43

Production in Italy: % changes Sector _1996/95

JJTZzzz[

Bran _2.9

Pasta _4,9

Biscuits and bread _-1.3

PmcessedfapgggtqWes(2)

Vegetable and animal fats 0.2

Slaughter and processing of meat -4,7

Ppjiyproducts (3) 0.4

pggpjefinipg -13.9

ojfecfionppy

Wine _-8.6

Mineral water and soft drinks 2.2

Beer and malt _-10.0

Arbmai feed -2.2

(1) Induding starch products.

(2) Including frozen fruit and vegetables (6% change). (3) Including ice-cream production (-6,9% change).

rflrnover in the food industry by sector in 1996 (‘billion lire)

Preserved fish Fruit uices and drinks Oilseed oil and flour

(1) Estimated figures.

Source: Confindustria, Report on Italian Agriculture, May 1997.

fri 1995, the distribution system was characterized by a general decrease in outlets and firms and a drop in ernplqyment. There was, however; a considerable increase in large-scale

retail.

The number of wholesale operators in the food sector continued to fall steadity during the year. Compared to the 1991 Census, there was a decrease of approximately 23%, which affected the whole of the

Food distribution channels in Italy(*

Distribution

countr bitt particularly the iVorth (-27%).

As regards retail outlets of fixed location, the recession tendency was confirmed, but to a lesser extent than in 1994. The average decrease in outlets was by 8%, varying between

the North (-11.8%,), the Centre (‘-7.7%,) andthe South (-5.1%,). As a consequence of this decrease, the ratio of outlets to inhabitants dropped even further: the number of

fixe(i food retail outlets affixed

location passed from an arerage qf I

outlet for ever’ 207 inhabitants in 1991 to 1 outlet for every 255 inhabitants in 1994, and to 1 outlet for every 282 inhabitants in 1995. The rationalization process had positive effects on the trend in

revenue: according to estimates ly the Ministry of’ Industry for food retail on tlets of fixed location, average revenue from sales in 1995 amounted

to 73 million lire per outlet, an increase

_?f

14.8% compared to 1994. The fod retail trade rep resented 35.3% of total retail trade in italy,

reaching 39.2% in the South. Voluntary groupings, associations and buying groups increased as a percentage of the total number of

operators (from 12S% in 1994 to 13.7% in 1995,), in contrast to a

slightfall in the number of associated retailers (‘-1.3%,).

Large-scale retail trade

On 1 January 1996 there were 4,77 supermarkets compared to 4,198 in the previous year; the most significant increase since 1981 (+14%). There was a parallel increase both in the total retail area, which reached 4.1 million m2 (+14%,), and in the total number of employees, which reached 90,432 units (+8.7%,). The number of

hypermarkets increased to 225, with a retail area of about 1.08 million rn

2 (+8.1%) and a number of employees equivalent to 30,000 laborer units (+9%,).

The turnover of large-scale retail

trade accounted for a steadily increasing proportion of total

fixed-location retail: from 37.4% in 1994 to 41.7% in 1995.

Wholesale “cash and carry” distribution remained the same as

the previous year; with 297 outlets

and a total area of about 710,000

m

2

for the sale offood.

Among emerging forms of retail, “hard discount stores” should be mentioned, of which there were about 2,000.

Source: Calculoted from dote from the Ministry of Trode, Industry and CroOn.

44

NORTH % % change 1996/91 CENTRE % % change 1996/91 SOUTH % % change 1996/91 -18.5 -lb 9 WHOLESALE 48.4 -26.9 19.3 -17.9 32.3 RETAILIE(XED OUTLETS) .1._5L._ 18.8 -25.5 ..4.55.._________ .-.. .. Wholesale/retail 26.4 19.7 13.5

Inhabitants per retail outlet 354 287 224 282

ITALY

no. % change 1996/91

39.081 -22.7

2flflRS -2R

(*)_{Asat Jut Jonuory 1996.}

NB. The figures in the above table are based on the findings of the 1991 Census, whereas for previous editions the findings of the 1981 Census wereused. Information an itineranT as opposed to fixed, outlets is being analy

zed.

Large-scale retail trade by geographical area (*)

Geographical Outlets Sales area Employees No. of outlets per Sales area

area (m2) 100,000 inhab. m2/1,000 inhab.

Nothj 2,748,239 15,005 flO

Centre 985 898,058 26,297 9.0 81.8

South 1226 j),]j 5.9 46.4

ti 5012 46i464 120466 88 807

(*)

Independent supermarkets, food departments in large stores and hypermarkets. As at 1st January 1996.

Source: calculated from data from the Ministry af frade, Industry and Crafts, “Structural features of the distribution system in ltaIy’ Rome,

September 1996.

r

In 1996 expenditure on food and drink amounted to about 200,000 billion lire, with a 2.8% increase in value compared to 1995. Prices rose on an average by 4.2% whereas quantities dropped by a considerable 1.3%. The drop in consumption Break-down offood consumption

Food Consumption

affected fresh ftiods in particular, whereas the consumption of processed food was sustained by large-scale retail channels. Consumers moved, in fact, towards a preference forbuyingfrom large-scale

retail outlets, favouring packaged

‘I

Joocls. €ompared to the prriiousjat;

there u’as a piirticulai’ drop iii the following Ibocls: oils and fats (-4.7%,), ulcohohc (lrink (-4.4%), sugar (-3%), meat (‘-2.4%,), fruit and vegetables (‘-22%,).

The proportion of total domestic

consumption expenditure represented by food dropped to 17.2% compaied to 17.6% in 1995 and over 22% ten years ago.

As regards geographical dffrences. consumption appeared to he increasing in the South, favoured by the modernization ofthe dist,ibution netivork.

7-In important part of the overall Jbod demand of the country ivas represented by food consumption outside the home (‘canteens, fast-food restaurants,), confirming the change in consumers eating habits.

The fbod which families spent most on was meat (52,000 billion lire,),

Ceren’nnul rrriI nrndiicfc₍₁₎

25,000 billion), fish (about 12,000 billion,), u’ine and other alcoholic drinks (about 11,000 billion). In a

break-down offood consumption over the last ten years, the proportion of meat, oils, fats, wine and other alcoholic drinks has dropped, whereas the proportion of dairy products, eggs and soft drinks has

risen. The EU figures for per capita

consumption of various types offood in the Community highlight the high content of Mediterranean products in

food consumption in Italy; Italy has the highest demand in the EU for cereal-based products and the

second-highest demand, after Greece,

for vegetables. Milk consumption, on

the other hand, c 40% lower than

the EU average and pork

consumption is approximately 20% lower

followed in ordcr qf importance by: fruit (about 42, 000 billion), hi’ead regetables (‘including potatoes) arid and cereal-based products (about Food consumption intheLU (kg per capita,)

Product Italy France Spain Greece Germany United Austria EU(7) Kingdom

Product % of total food Averageannualrate ofchange 1996 6(Yo

expenditure Quantity Price Breadandcereak4

Meat 26.2 -038i

Fish 5.9 1.08_4i_

Dryoduceandeg_ 15.3

o

4

__J

Fats and oils 4.1 - -0.85

Jtan4yeetahles)]L 21.0 0.36 Other (2) 7.3 1.30 Alcoholic drinks 5.3 —. -1.73 Non-alcoholic drinks 2.5 5.91 5.22 OVERALk 100.0 0.21 4.72 (1) Including potatoes.

(2) Coffee, tea, cacao, sugac lam, confectionery etc.

—,‘ -.. Rice 5 4 1 5 3 4 na. 5 Potatoes 41 13 92 87 13 108 61 80 /qgp)ghle(2)P5ns.16347 8Ons. 80 n Fruit inclugcitras (2) 125 n 96 124 98 na 95 na Milk (3) 62 95 126 64 92 139 111 104 Cheese 18 23 8 19 18 7 13 15 Batter 2 9 0 1 7 4 5 5 Total meat 85 98 101 18 89 10 97 88 Beef 26 27 13 22 18 18 20 21 Pork 33 36 54 23 56 24 56 41

Fats and oils (4) 32 22 31 33 23 na. 24 na.

Sugar (5) 21 34 30 30 35 no_ns.32

Wine(6) 60 63 41 24 22 13 31 36

(1) In flour equivalent.

(2) Including pracessed products, dried fruit and nuts. (3) Including other fresh produce,’ refers to 1994. (4) Spain and Greece: only ails of vegetable origin.

NB. Data refer to the 1994/5 suasan; dairy products and meat to 1994.

(5) White sugar equivalent. (6) Litres per head.

(7) Suga milk, cheese and butter: FY15. For all others: FY12.

no.=not available

Foreign Trade

I 11821 66.6 23.4 3,601 13.5 -40.2 2i 26.1 12.1 945 3.5 -62.7 8.1 15.2 863 3.2 -28.7 913 3.4 50.3 140 0.5 -13.5 333 1.2 -66.8 80 0.3 -59.3 566 2.1 -45.7 819 3.1 -2.2 323 1.2 31.0 84 0.3 1.6 4±23 16.9 13.0 1.243 4.6 94 0.4

The agri—ood balance and the agri-industrial system(*)

Product 1980 1990 1996 MACRO-ECONOMKAGGREGATES 41,501 ..JiL4i. 13,480 4,877 Balance -174_ Volume of tracjL_ 4j74 7Q,j0 tconsumtion(L..-_---

QJQ4

In 1996 the tradedeficit in the agri food sector amounted to 17,404

billion lire, showing a great improvement compared to the previous year and returning to absolute values similar to those at the beginning.of the l990’s. This improvement was due to tu’o tendencies: on the one hand, a

considerable reduction in imports (‘-3.7%,) and on the other; an increase in exports (+2.2%,). These figures confirm the positive trend in foreign trade in the food sector, a trend

which has become evident over the lust few years arid which has led to a

considerable improvement in the degree of trade cover.

More than 65% of Italian trade in the agri-food sector took place within the EU; France and Germany in particular were our country’s main trading partners, as regards both purchases and sales. Among non-EU

Geographical distribution ofItalian agri-food trade, 1996 (billion lire)

₍₎

Imports % Country UROPEAN UNION 15 France Gwmay Netherlands 2 I...,-.k....,.-. Exports % Nb (1) Country 28)34

-AQ4

1,4Q4 1 1N7 of Propensity to import (5) 26.9 pppsitoepprt(6L .JJL_—---.--22 Degreeoftradecover(1) 36.2 43.2 60.6 Imports % 61.9 20.0 12.8 9.8 3.8 3.1 6.5 0.4 4.0 0.7 3.6 2.0 0.4 0.2 8.2 1.2 0.0 Eiports % Nb (1) ppjp z,I6 Pnrtuqal 183 Denmark 1,616 Ireland 314 Greece 1,511 Auslnia 855 Sweden 170 Finland 81

JHER DEVELOPED COUNTRIES 3,483

cwitzerland 492

21

(*)_{Billion lire at current prices; figures fur agri-industrial production}

and trade also include “cured toboccoT

(1) VFO in agriculture, forestry and fishing plus VA at market prices in the food industry.

(2) Sum of exports and imparts.

countries, the United States, Brazil, Argentina and the Central and Eastern European ciuntries (‘CEEs,) continued to be important trading

Unted States - LSJL 3.1 _{iQZ__7.6}

Canada 288 0.7 358 1.3 10.9 CEECs 998 24 — 930 35 36 Poland 295 0.1 189 0.7 21.9 0.9 97 0.1 181 0.7 7TJ 28-- jj6 43 T -- 3.2 -20.2 5.4 -64.0 0.3 -81.9 0.8 -63.8 1 0.0 -96.6 26,140 100.0 22.6 Hungary ___. ._ . 393_ Czech Republic .._

OTHER EAST EUROPEAN STATES L186

MEDITERRANEAN COUNTRIES(2) 1,291 REST OF WORLD__________ 6,628 Argentina _.JS2 Brazil 993 China 416 TOTAL 42,320

(3) Agrliindustrial production plus imports minus exports. (4) Ratio of production to consumption. (5) Ratio of imports to consumption. (6) Rota of exports to production. (7) Rota of exports to imports.

partners; trade with the CEECs in particular showed rapid growth, esp ecially as regards Italiaci exports.

. 43.3

Norway -.- ..

-48

I

Primary sector products represented 37% of total agri-food imports and 32% of exports. Among imports, cereals and live animals remained of prime importance, while fruit and vegetables dominated exports. As far

____56 15.1 1,454 2.0 85 _________ 2.3 220 1.0 100.0

(*)_{Excluding “cured tobocco’}

(1) Normalised balance (see glossary). (2) Mediterranean countries in non-EU Europe, Africa andAsia. Meat, fish pror”mets and dairy produce accounted for a signflcant proportion of imports in this sector, u’hile drinks, especially wine, made a considerable contribution to

exports. as products from the food processing

industry were concerned, the trade deficit was lower than the deficit in the primary sector and showed a

considerable improvement compared to the previous year.

Commercio estero per principaliconipartiagricoli-alintentari, 1996 (‘mrd. C) (*,)

Product Imports Exports. Nb (1) Product Imports Exports Nb (1)

% % Cereals 166 -89.5 fyggjsesanyeggtqhies 496 1,335 401 243 -518 Freshfruit 1,181 39.0 Citrus fruit 218 229 2.4

Raw textile fibres 21 -96.4

Oilseeds 617 15 -95.3

Coffee and spkes 55 -93.1

owers

and omarnentajants 494 550 5

Uncured tobacco 208 388 30.2

live animals 2,235 76 -93.4

-cattle 51 -93.5

Other livestock products 906 53 -89.0

Fores)oducts 1,551 244 -12.8

Fish and game 1,192 211 -63.0

Other products ___2O4 —- 152 -14.6

TOTAL PRIMARY SECTOR 15,805 6,504 41.1

(*) Ecluding “cured tobacco”. (1) Nb=Normalized balance (see glossary).

(2) Fresh and lang life.

CereNsppcts

Sugar and confgçjojjy_ Fresh and frozen meat Processed meat Pmcessed angjgygprved

fish

Pmcessedyggges

Processed fruit

yyuct

-milk (2) -cheese Oils and fats Oilcake and oilseed flour

Drinks

_____________

-wine

Other food industry products

TOTAL FOOD INDUSTRY

513 10 228 2934 885 527

Li

—Q-Q

JL

234 4018 26,516 162 98.8 -4.9 -14.0 60.9 -81.4 26.9 42.1 -48.9 -98.3 -22.5 -21.7 -70.6

—4---820 936 302 -L2

_LQ

10 _iAQS 312 4,583 3,284 1,646 20,231 56.1 86.7 -41.9 -13.4

STRUCTURE OF

THE FARMING INDUSTRY

TOTALAGRI-FOODSECTOR 42,321 26,141 - -22.6

Cured tobacco 1,831 13 -98.6

TOTAL AGRI-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR 44,158 26,154 -24.5

In 1995 iS TAT carried out its

secOn(l two—yearly Community survey on the structure of firms after cariying out a similar survey in 1993, following the programme of surveys set up by the EUafter the

Introduction

Fourth General lgricniturui Census

of 1990.

Being a Community survey, the

results which are given below refer to the farms in the so-called EEC ‘field ofsurvey”, which does not

include all farms because it excludes

those with less than a hectare of used agricultural land (UAL,) and u’ith a marketed output below a certain value in the year concerned (2,000,000 lire in the 1995 survey).

Farms and Farm Land

In /995, 2,482,095 Italian farms were included in the EU survey, with a total area of 20.5 million hectares and 14.7 million hectares of U4L. Compared to the situation which emerged in the previous survey in

1993, there was a 0.3% decrease in the number offarms (either because they had closed down or because they did not meet the minimum

survey requisites,), a 0.5% decrease in the total area offarm land and a 0.3% decrease in the total area of UAL.

The highest drop in the number of farms occurred in the North

(-0.4%,), especially in the North- West while the highest drop in the total area offarm land (‘-1%) and UAL (‘-0.8%,) occurred in the Centre. In spite ofthe minimum requisites

laid down by the EU for its survey, very small farms continued to

Farms andfarm land (land in hectares,) Farms

I

2.2%.

11.2% 54.0%

North-East

Used agricultural land (UAL)

18.1%

N

ITALY

North-West

account/or a high proportion of total farms. Over a haf of Italian farms did not reach two hectares of

UAL (-1.1% compared to 1993,); they accounted, however, for’ only 7,4% of total Italian tAL. just over one third of farms possessed less than one hectare of UAL, with an average area per farm of/mist over haf a hectare. One third of UAL, on the other hand, was concentrated in less than 40,000 farms owning 50

hectares or over of UAL (1.6% of the total number of farms,), with an average urea per farm of 122.2

hectares.

In a comparison with the situation in 1993, there was a slight increase in the number of farms with less

than 5 hectares of UAL, a more marked drop in medium-sized farms and a signficant increase in farms with over 20 hectares of UAL. 16.2%

46,9% Total farm land

16.5%

42.1%

ITALY North-West North-East Centre ITALY North-West Centre South

54

South North-East Centre South

55

Ore, 96%

(?f

the frirnis in the sit ru cv we r: mu threc tly by the

farmer and in 82.6% of cases, he

ran his fauna by himselfor with

the help of family workers

(iinrnediate family and/or relatives,).

Farms

No. %

frunilylabour (16.3 hectares,). The average size of farms run with hired workers and/or

partners, on the other hand, was

much higher, reaching 58.1 hectares, a significant increase compared to 1993 (+11.9%). Number offarins and used agricultural land by size of UAL and geographical area

Farms No. % UAL Hectares % o/_ti Farms UAL

Forms

01

warm Management

Sejeç Without UAL 0.2 0 0.0 2.5 0.0 tin to 0.99 818,522 35.4 3.0 5.7 0.8 -1.99: 471,364 19.0 6424 4.4 -11.7 -11.8 -4.99 583,186 23.5 1,810,199 12.3 4.6 5.0 .9.99 258,113 10.4 1,778’54 12.1 -4.0 -4.1 10- 19.99 140,174 5.6 1,921,319 13.1 -11.0 -10.6 20-49.99 105,300 4.2 ,jJQ,085 21.6 12.7 12.9 50 ond over 40,252

-

1.6 4,21 8,985 33.5 -0.9 -2.2 TOTAL 095 1000 14,frT .i.i _{1000 03 03} Geographical areQ

—--—--——-—..——--—--._______

-. North 128,053 29.3 5,123jjS 34.9

—

-0.4 0.0 Centre 412,545 16.6 2,679,028 18.2 -0.1 -0.8 South 1,341,497 54.0 6,882,646 46.8 -0.2 -0.4

The average size of fzrms run directly by the farmer himself diffrmedconsiderably accomthng to u’/iether the farm was run only

withfamily labour (5.6 hectares), mainly ivith flimily labour (10.5 hectares) or mainly with

non-jTvumberoffarms and total farm land,byform of management(*,)

Form of management Run directly by former

I

56

% Changes compared 1o1993

Hectares % Farms Farm land

._______

‘52iL

96.3 .J -1.2

-yjwithfomJjyjabour 82.6 55.6 0.3 -1.5

-Iwithfom4yj9._______

2i.... .J

_.

-1.4 0.4

IyjypyfamilIaboyj_____________ 84,,06 3A 1,311,866

--

6.1 -0.1

fhired workers ond/orpners_... 85,361 3.4 4,960,714 4.2 -8.1 2.3

ore-çnpr other 6,997 0.3 13,421 0.4 -11.0 -22.6

TOTAL 2,482,095 100.0 20,481,162 100.0 0.3 05

(*)_{Including farms with na agricultural land.}

FARMS PLANTED AREA

No. % of Hectares % of total Average per

Crop total farms farm land farm (hectares)

POPLARS ...2j942 0.3 3.0

WOODS 559,52522.5 19.0 1.0

UNUSED AGR. LAND 413,851 16J 4.1 2.0

OThERAREAS 1,683,611 67.8 1,006,110 —4.9 0.6

TOTAL 2,478,102 20,481,163 100.0 8.3

(*)_{Excluding farms with aa agricultural land.}

(I) Including hausehald pints.

L’.4L, which represented 71.7% of

total fzrrn land, _{was used as follows:}

56.4%for _{arable crops, divided}

mainly between cereals (28.7%,) and rotation firage (13.4%); 25.6% for permanent grass andpasture; 114% for permanent tree crops, including vines and olive trees which occupied together some 1.9 million hectares (of which vines occupied 870 thousand hectares) and which, counted separ(Itely, were planted on around one million firms.

Of the remaining 28.3% of total farm

land, approximateljt 4 million hectares (19% of total farm land) was under tree cultivation (woodland and poplar groves).

IJse

01 Land

In 1995, 40.4% of total land was Number offarmsand area of land planted to main crops(*,) used ftr amble crops (including

household plots) and 12.5% for

FARMS PLANTED AREA

permanent tree crops (vines, olive

— No. % of Hectares %of total Averageper

trees, fruit trees etc). These crops _{Crop totalfarms farmland farm (hectares)} were present on over 60% of all

_______________

Italianfarms. ARABLE (1) ]4336 _ 40.4

Cereals Q63i.8_4.,216,6O4 — 20.6 -softwheat 310,311 12.5 771,569. 3.8 -hard wheat 326,146 13.2 1,572,209 — 7.1 -maize 380,013 15.3 947,397 4.6 Potatoes 135,026 5.4 63,447 0.3 Sugar beet 62,805 LQ.4._.__J. ________ ___________ 319,152 12.9 305,215__. 1.5 Rotation foraoe 454217 18.3 1,960,562 9.h 4.9 4.5 2.5 4.8 2.5 0.5 4.3 1.0 4.3 PERMANENTPASTUREANDGRASS 586,242 23.6 — 3,758,216 18.3 6.4 PERMANENTCROPS 1,569,450 63.2 2,556,308 12.5 1.6 Fruit 334,552 13.5 458,239 2.2 1.4 Citrusfruit 116,605 4.7 185,935 0.9 1.6 Vines 34.8 868,181 4.2 1.0 Olives 923,491 37.2 1,014,156 5.0 1.1 Ediblechestnuts 51,981 2.3 87,527 0.4 1.5 TOTAL 2,417,511 14,685,448 11,1 5,9

58

₅₉

Livestock Farms

There was a steady decrease in the number offarms u’ith livestock. in 1995, there were approximately 830,000 livestock farms: a 2.2% drop compared to 1993, and a 14.3% drop compared to the 1990

increased (‘+2.7%for shep, +3.9% for goats,). Compared to 199.3, the average size offirm remained the

same in the case of pig farms and increased slightly in the case of cattle, sheepandgoatfitrms.

______________________ %changes compared to 1990 Farms Head 57 -2.3 -21.2 .44 -2.3 -4.0 -19.4 -40 1.6 2.1 -3.8 22.3 -4.3 3.9 -13.9 10.1 114 .77 _______ -29.5 -19.8 -13.1 _______ -6.7 _______ -29.8 -14.1 -10.4 -12.3 -288 -34.2 Agricultural Census.

Both cattle and pig farming

dropped, both in number offarms and number of head (-2.3% in head of cattle and -4% in hea(l ofpigs).

The number of sheep and goats

Livestock farms and number of head

Cattle and pig farms by miumber of head

No. Total Average

farms no. head no./farm

Type of livestock Cattle __________ Goats ___________ Poultry -chickens for meat -hensfor 537,002 505,994 % changes compared to 1993 Farms Head iL4iJL49± jQ4j1 28,580 28,811,014 29 29 70 18 257 263 57 TOTAL 829,486 -- -2.2 - -14.3

o. head No. farms % No. head % % changes compared to 1993 % changes compared to 1990

onfarm Farms Head Farms Head

-..-...---.--... --- .-.---...- ----— i: 43,697 17.3 68,455 0.9 -4.6 -5.6 -22.9 -9 82,136 32.6 447,902 6.0 -9.8 -9.1 -29.3 i-ij:T 45,565 617,284 8.3 -6.1 -6.3 -23.8 f9 46,407 18.4 1,407,893 19.0 0.6 1.2 -10.9 1.2 1 1 6.8 -7.2 -7.6 -11,1 0yac. 15,912 333202L4OJ_ 10.7 J0.3 OTAL 251,965100 1,411,491 100 57 -2.3 -21.2 4 .---.-.-- -_________ - -.---.--.-1-2 196,127 10.3 278,314 3.5 -6.3 -6.3 -26.1 -26.1 A” 56,051 20.1 243,125 3.0 9.2 8.7 -15.3 -13.2 1O49 11,591 6.3 346,555 4.3 5.8 6.9 1.6 9.6 0-99 2,423 0.9 168,166 2.1 9.3 9.9 21.2 34.0 6,800 2.4 1,024,51687.1 2,5,,,... -5.1 5.7 -3.9 TOTAL 278,998 1 8,060,676 100 -2.3 -4.0 -2’ -4.1

60

61

Irrigation

_Labour

Just over 26% of Italian firms used irrigation, on 2. 7 million hectares of land (18.4% of IJAL,). compared to 1993, there ivas a decrease in the number of farms using irrigation (-2.1%,) but an increase in the land involved (‘+1.8%,).

Approximately two thirds of irrigated land were situated in North Italy; where it was used on almost 34% of U4L and on 35.4% offarms with UAL.

In Central Italy a mere 8.2% of LiAL was irrigated on 18.2% of

farms, and in the South, 10.8% of tAL was irrigated on 23.8% of farms.

The average area of irrigatedland

is increasing in the Aorth and

South but is falling in Central Italy

(ontinuirig or, the series of sin’veys

begun in 1993, the 1995 surrey

gathered information on the entire family of the farmer, including members who had not reached

working age and members who lived on thefarm but did not spend a

single day on agricultural work in the crop year 1994-95.

A total of 2,4 70,566 farm families were counted, in which the dfferent categories of famiy members

(farmer, wif’, other immediate

family and relations,) worked a total of 372 million days, equal to 86.2%

of the total input of’ work; most of these days were worked by the firmer himnsef(’50.3%,).

Of the remaining 13. % of work,

which was carried out by non-family members, 10.6% was carried

omit by temnpo ru ry workers (day

labourers, manual workers and

otherw,).

In comparison with 1993, there was a drop in the total input of work; this was due entirely to a decrease in the category of non-family labour (‘-2.5%,), which was only partially counter-balanced by the increase in

the volume of work put in by the

family (‘+0.2%,) and in particular by the farmer (+0.6%).

Three quarters of farmers worked exclusivelyon their own farms (‘full-time), while about 23.5% offarmers u’orked prevalently in off-farm activities, not necessarily of an agricultural nature.

More farmners in the North of Italy Mainly worked full-tbne on their farms

Ott _{(79.6%,) than in the Centre (72%,)}

arm _{and the South (73.4%).}

—

Farms which use irrigation

Geographical Farms Irrigated land % changes compared to 1993 % changes compared to 1990 area No. % of tot. Hectares % of Average Farms Irrigated Farms Irrigated

farms tot, per farm land land with UAL UAL (heciares)

North — 257,736 35.4 1,131,086 33.9 6.1 1.3 5.2

— -14.4 3.1

Centre 74,891 18.2 219,694 — 8.2 2.9 1.6 -8.4 28.2 -6.4

South 319,211 23.8 141,233 10.8 2.3 5.5 -2.3 -— -30.6 -4.7

ITALY 651,904 26.3 2,698,013 18.4 4.1 2.1 1.8 -24.7 0

Farms according to on-farm/off-farm activity offarmer Geographical Total Only Mainly

area on on farm farm North 121,439 5j4,2 133,880 Centre 409,022 294,412 6,331 108,279 South - 1,340,105 983,389 19,461 331,255 ITALY 2,410,566 1,852093 39,059 519,414

I

62

₆₃

% change compared to 1993 0.2 0.6 0.4 Dys worked by each category of laboar

Category 1995 Number % FAMILY LABOUR

SjLj9

86.2 -former i]261 50.3 sI__ i548 - 35.9 NON-FAMILY LABOUR 13.8 -2.5 -permanent workers 3.2 — -3.1 --temporary workers 45,880 10.6 -0.1 TOTAL — 431 211 1000 02

ECONOMIC RESULTS

ACCORDING TO FADN

64

INEA, the official link between the Italian State and the lit-fot the implementation of the Farm

Accountancy Data Network (PADN,, gathers informa two on a sample of farms, the number of which varies each year between 16,000 and 20,000.

1995 Incomes

The accountancy data is collected with the collaboration of the

Regions and Farmers’ Associations

according to ]f’iEA methods, which

highlight structural charac

teristics, factor endouinent, and

the break-down of production and costs.

The basic data, after being validated and processed, goesinto

a national data bank and is then

printed in appropriate

publications.

Further information of a more

(le tailed na toic is availa blefrom all IAEA regional offices.

Variable Fixed Net costs costs income

‘1

Average farm data according to altitude of territoii’ 1995

veragefarni data 1v geographical area, 1995

Geographical FARMS UAL LU VFO Variable Fixed Net area (no.) (hectares) (no.) costs costs Income

Type FARMS UAL LU VFO

ol territory (no.) (hectares) (no.)

Mountainous

-

3,604 21.33 1.81 83535 39,658 JjlJJy 1,275 22.47 1.14 34,349 Lowland 4,847 19.01 1.82 146,891 63,188 TOTAL 15126 (‘000 lire) (‘000 lire)

-]--31,604 2252 1.18 105.551 44,454 23,293 47,619 iiAL 64,530

66

—

1.91 146,104 64,,7 33,569i’ CENTRE 2,886 __ 22.18 1.85 93,060 33,488 23,641 41,286 SOUTH 6,313 25.13 1.55 68,114 28,301 12,511 34,601 TOTAL 15,726 22.52 178 105,551 44,454 23,293 47,679

Average farm data by geographical area- changes1995/94 (‘000lire,)

Geographical VFO % change Variable costs % change Fixed costs % change Net income % change area 1994 1995 1994 1995 1994 1995 1994 1995 NORTH 122,595 146,704 19.67 57,006 64,927 13.89 31,133 33,569 7.82 48,105 63,156 31.29 CENTRE 11,180 93,060 30.74 28,238 33,488 18.59 20,391 23,641 15.90 21,814 41,286 4ãf2 SOUTH 60,610 68,114 13.31 24,631 28,301 14.90 11,692 12,511 7.01 29,769 34,601 16,23 TOTAL 87,477 105,551 20.66 38,293 44,454 16.09 21,163 23,293 10.01 36,144 41,679

67

Average farm data by ESIJ, 1995 FARMS UAL (no.) (hectares) 2-4ESU 104 7.01 4-8ESU ___ 40 1284

8-16ESU

442_____

17.79 4OESU 24.90 40-100ESU 33.21 Over 100 ESU 506 61.18 1 5.126 22.52

VFO Variable costs Fixed costs Netincome

LU (no.) 1.13 1.21 1.49 1.83 2.54 4.19 1.18 (‘000 lire) 19Q5 L$16 jj16 742 ,,jjj93 12,,33 j4 13,98 101,754 412i,_j2__4,Q4, 228,352 2],L519 45,548 105,518 591,564 __________ 262710 131,134 241,745 44.454 23.293 41,619 , , ..

Average farm data by type offarm, 1995

‘“ FARMS UAL LU VFO Variable costs Fixed costs Net income

(no.) (hectares) (no.) _{(‘000 lire)}

Arable 24.21 1.52 — 88,604

3Q,Q

Horticultural 977 2.15 1.99 - 108,943 4,748 44,094 3,352 9.22 —. 87,295 21,779 Herbivorous livestock 4,096 37.96 1.96 137,832 72,427 24,321 Granivorous livestock 98 10.44 2.04 228,805 ,,,,,,,,,4j,,99 11 5,984 16.49 1.73 ,76,312 24,j8 20,360 32,455 Mixed livestock 413 1 8.18 1.96 11 0,427 58,, 22,115 44480 Mixed 1,490 26.29 1.84 108,244 53,746 24,208 48,416 TOTAL 15126 2252 178 105551 44454 23293 41619

PRODUCTS

OF DESIGNATED ORIGIN

AND

OF SPECIFIC CHARACTER

AND

ORGANIC FARMING

European Union definitions

At present, Italian and EU regulatIons governing the recognition and protection of designations of origin play an important part in deciding supply differentiation stfategies, both at single farm level and at national level, as an instrument for increasing the country’s competitiveness in the food sector. In particular, Regulations 2081 and 2082 passed by the European councilon 14/07/92 define andset down rules for PDO (‘protected designation of origin), P01

(protected geographical indication,) an(l certification of specific character and they create a legal framework for protected

designation, with the explicit aim of enhancing and promoting products

ofspeqfic character

The difference between PDO and PCI is that in order to obtain

recognition of the former; all stages

ofproduction and processing of the commodity concerned must take place in a specific geographical area, whereas for the latter; it is sufficient that the quality or reputation of the commodity can be attributed to its geographical origin, while part of the production process is allowed to take place outside the area.

Certification of specific character is the recognitionof a characteristic or

set of characteristics which

distinguish an agricultural or food product from similar products in the

same category: in other ivords, the

specific character of the product

derives from its production

characteristics and not froni its

place of’ origin, its geographical location or the application of

innovative technology:

Product speccations must provide all the necessary data for recognizing the origin or specific character of the product, and are

essential for the declaration of confbrmity of the product.

Community regulations give inspection bodies (supervisory structures whose responsibilities are established by each Member State,)

the task of ensuring that products

with protected designation or certification of specific character meet the conditions laid dou’n in their specifications.

The lawprotecting the designation of origin cheeses dates buck to

1954 and was the first of its kind to be applied in this country According to Law 125 dated 10 April 1954, cheeses with “designation of origin” are cheeses

produced in certain geographical

areas in accordance with long-held local traditions andpossessing

chara cteris tics which derive

,nain1y from the specific

environmental conditions in which they are made.

According to the same law, cheeses with “designation of specific

character” are cheeses produced on

national territory in accordance u;ith long-held local traditions with rio specification of the area from which the raw materials come, but

which possess characteristics

inspection bodies to supervise the correct application of the regulations.

Designation o Origin

I

Dairy Products

(heeseswithdesignationof origin

Btto -- - -

--- ParnanoRegg

BrO Pecorino Romano

CadocavalloSilano Sard

r ‘ L’ —

LOSCIOflO UI ufuIFlO _{Pecorino Siciliano}

1’ • __________________:—_________,_ Lanesraro fg ___________ _________ Pecorino Toscano _______________ Provolone Valodana FioreSardo _________________________ ronlina _______________ Ragusano __________

FormM GeMet dell’afruVol Brembanu Raschera

—

_______

gpizo

__ __RobiolaRoccaverano:”

Groan Padano Ialeggio’””U’c’’

Montasio Toma Piemontese

Monte Veronese

Mozzarella di bufola compana ValtehaCar’’’

deriving from special techniques of production.

Law 125 also sets up special

71

70